5 ms·

It seems like a statement from The Sweetshop, who made the ad, has also been pulled. This piece links to a Futurism article[0], which in turn links to "an incr

by macintux 11mo ago

It seems like a statement from The Sweetshop, who made the ad, has also been pulled. This piece links to a Futurism article[0], which in turn links to "an incredibly defensive statement"[1] from the ad agency. > “For seven weeks, we hardly slept, with up to 10 of our in-house AI and post specialists at The Gardening Club [our in-house AI engine] working in lockstep with the directors,” Sweetshop’s CEO wrote. (Sounds more like sweatshop than sweetshop, but I digress.) However, that "defensive statement" link is broken, and I see no sign of it on the linked site, but I did find this older lamentation[2] from The Sweetshop regarding AI, or more specifically regarding the attitude that AI should allow you to cut costs and fire people. > Being asked to cut 20–30% of creative costs and labour under the banner of ‘AI’ is unimaginative at best, and corrosive at worst. It drains the value of human creativity and concentrates it in fewer and fewer hands, hollowing out the very industry it claims to improve. [0] https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/mcdonalds-ai-generated-commercial https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/mcdonalds-ai-ge... [1] https://lbbonline.com/news/melanie-bridge-sweetshop-the-gardening-club-mcdonalds https://lbbonline.com/news/melanie-bridge-sweetshop-the-gard... (missing page, and the Wayback Machine doesn't have a copy) [2] https://lbbonline.com/news/Damn-The-Race-to-the-Bottom-AI-Shouldnt-Be-Cost-Cutting-Machine https://lbbonline.com/news/Damn-The-Race-to-the-Bottom-AI-Sh...

dfxm12 11mo ago
Seems like one could have created a cheaper, higher quality ad with real actors. Of course, real actors have unions and part of the point of AI is to make labor weaker.
- falcor84 11mo ago
  As I see it, the purpose of AI is the same as the purpose of every technology ever since the hand axe - to reduce labor. Humans have a strong drive to figure out ways to achieve more with less effort. Obviously there are higher order effects, but same as we wouldn't expect the Homo Erectus to stop playing with stone tools because they'd disrupt their society (which of course they did), I don't understand why we should decide to halt technological progress now.
  - dfxm12 11mo ago
    I'm not sure what from my comment suggested pausing technological progress, unless you assume technical progress can only be achieved by exploiting workers. While that is happening, I don't think this it is a requirement. What we see happening in the workforce with AI isn't reducing labor. We see firms making fewer workers do more work and laying off the rest, as in this case, where workers are talking about "hardly sleeping". Similarly, in my org, workers aren't expected to do any less work since adopting AI tools. This case suggests quality is down as well, but maybe that's subjective.
    - rpdillon 11mo ago
      I mean, we're watching the world try to figure out how to use a new set of tools. As with so many disruptive technologies, the initial stages of development appear to be drop in quality and inferior to the status quo. That usually reverses within five to ten years. That said, I agree with you that AI is not going to lead to people doing less work, in the same way that computers didn't lead to people doing less work.
      - eek2121 11mo ago
        The non-technical folks don't understand the very real limitations, hallucinations, and security risks that LLMs introduce into workflows. Tech CEOs and leadership are shoving it down everyone's throats without understanding it. Google/Microsoft are shoving it down everyone's' throats without asking, and with all the layoffs that have happened? People are understandably rejecting it. The entire premise is also CURRENTLY built around copyrighted infringement, which makes any material produced by an LLM questionable legally. Unless the provider you are using has a clause saying they will pay for all your legal bills, you should NOT be using an LLM at work. This includes software development, btw. Until the legal issue is settled once and for all, any company using an LLM may risk becoming liable for copyright infringement. Possibly any individual depending on the setup.
        rpdillon 11mo ago
ToucanLoucan 11mo ago
The attempts by both this outfit and the one that did the Coke ad to walk the line of simultaneously touting what a labor saving device these models are while also trying desperately to make it seem like they did some actual work somewhere so they can also be respected as creatives is honestly hilarious. Like I thought the whole point of these stupid things was that any John Q off the street could make awesome videos? If that's the case, then what in the utter hell is the point of a making of video featuring people playing at being creative?
- dfxm12 11mo ago
  Like I thought the whole point of these stupid things was that any John Q off the street could make awesome videos? Have you played around with stuff like sora 2 or veo 3 or seen the work of regular John Q's who have? In general, the quality of marketing for AI tools is far better than the quality of AI-generated video. These tools are also kinda expensive for the average John Q off the street... I also think most people greatly underestimate just how much creativity is required to make a good movie, or how hard it can be to direct.
  - IAmBroom 11mo ago
    Counterpoint: a blind monkey could have accidentally made a better commercial than this one by entering random letters into an AI prompt.
    - lioeters 11mo ago
      “For seven weeks, our blind monkeys hardly slept, banging away at the typewriter in an inspired rush to produce the best prompts for the next McDonald's ad."
- mingus88 11mo ago
  The editors of the AI clips haven’t figured out yet that you can just train a second LLM to act as editor They are the labor equivalent of the factory manager that is dutifully working for the bosses that are working to close the factory.
Centigonal 11mo ago
How does this kind of work take 7 weeks for 10 people? 10 animators could hand-draw every frame of a 44 second ad in that time. They could spend an hour on each frame, completely trash and redo the entire commercial, take an extra week for meetings and rework, and still have time to spare.
- R_D_Olivaw 11mo ago
  Because they have to constantly pull the slot machine lever on the ai video generator. Never quite getting what they want with the word salad prompt.
dandelionv1bes 11mo ago
Complete tangent but “in lockstep” really seems to be doing the rounds again as corpo speak. It honestly annoys me but I can’t explain why - maybe because they’re not a military but an ad production company.

dfxm12 11mo ago

Seems like one could have created a cheaper, higher quality ad with real actors. Of course, real actors have unions and part of the point of AI is to make labor weaker.

falcor84 11mo ago
As I see it, the purpose of AI is the same as the purpose of every technology ever since the hand axe - to reduce labor. Humans have a strong drive to figure out ways to achieve more with less effort. Obviously there are higher order effects, but same as we wouldn't expect the Homo Erectus to stop playing with stone tools because they'd disrupt their society (which of course they did), I don't understand why we should decide to halt technological progress now.
- dfxm12 11mo ago
  I'm not sure what from my comment suggested pausing technological progress, unless you assume technical progress can only be achieved by exploiting workers. While that is happening, I don't think this it is a requirement. What we see happening in the workforce with AI isn't reducing labor. We see firms making fewer workers do more work and laying off the rest, as in this case, where workers are talking about "hardly sleeping". Similarly, in my org, workers aren't expected to do any less work since adopting AI tools. This case suggests quality is down as well, but maybe that's subjective.
  - rpdillon 11mo ago
    I mean, we're watching the world try to figure out how to use a new set of tools. As with so many disruptive technologies, the initial stages of development appear to be drop in quality and inferior to the status quo. That usually reverses within five to ten years. That said, I agree with you that AI is not going to lead to people doing less work, in the same way that computers didn't lead to people doing less work.
    - eek2121 11mo ago
      The non-technical folks don't understand the very real limitations, hallucinations, and security risks that LLMs introduce into workflows. Tech CEOs and leadership are shoving it down everyone's throats without understanding it. Google/Microsoft are shoving it down everyone's' throats without asking, and with all the layoffs that have happened? People are understandably rejecting it. The entire premise is also CURRENTLY built around copyrighted infringement, which makes any material produced by an LLM questionable legally. Unless the provider you are using has a clause saying they will pay for all your legal bills, you should NOT be using an LLM at work. This includes software development, btw. Until the legal issue is settled once and for all, any company using an LLM may risk becoming liable for copyright infringement. Possibly any individual depending on the setup.
      - rpdillon 11mo ago

ToucanLoucan 11mo ago

The attempts by both this outfit and the one that did the Coke ad to walk the line of simultaneously touting what a labor saving device these models are while also trying desperately to make it seem like they did some actual work somewhere so they can also be respected as creatives is honestly hilarious. Like I thought the whole point of these stupid things was that any John Q off the street could make awesome videos? If that's the case, then what in the utter hell is the point of a making of video featuring people playing at being creative?

dfxm12 11mo ago
Like I thought the whole point of these stupid things was that any John Q off the street could make awesome videos? Have you played around with stuff like sora 2 or veo 3 or seen the work of regular John Q's who have? In general, the quality of marketing for AI tools is far better than the quality of AI-generated video. These tools are also kinda expensive for the average John Q off the street... I also think most people greatly underestimate just how much creativity is required to make a good movie, or how hard it can be to direct.
- IAmBroom 11mo ago
  Counterpoint: a blind monkey could have accidentally made a better commercial than this one by entering random letters into an AI prompt.
  - lioeters 11mo ago
    “For seven weeks, our blind monkeys hardly slept, banging away at the typewriter in an inspired rush to produce the best prompts for the next McDonald's ad."
mingus88 11mo ago
The editors of the AI clips haven’t figured out yet that you can just train a second LLM to act as editor They are the labor equivalent of the factory manager that is dutifully working for the bosses that are working to close the factory.

Centigonal 11mo ago

How does this kind of work take 7 weeks for 10 people? 10 animators could hand-draw every frame of a 44 second ad in that time. They could spend an hour on each frame, completely trash and redo the entire commercial, take an extra week for meetings and rework, and still have time to spare.

R_D_Olivaw 11mo ago
Because they have to constantly pull the slot machine lever on the ai video generator. Never quite getting what they want with the word salad prompt.

dandelionv1bes 11mo ago

Complete tangent but “in lockstep” really seems to be doing the rounds again as corpo speak. It honestly annoys me but I can’t explain why - maybe because they’re not a military but an ad production company.